Hubris. They think they know what they’re doing, but don’t. At the Mac Pro mea culpa, they very strangely asserted that pros at Apple “still use a Mac,” as if some reasonable alternative existed. In their minds, the reasonable alternative was iPad. https://t.co/5TrHg4M0LS

As far as I’m concerned, Apple is already late. It’s their job to understand where things are going and make these kinds of changes when the opportunities present themselves, not to wait until after it becomes obvious to everyone.

If you try to jam keyboard and mouse into iPad, just so you can say it replaced your computer, iPad is no longer designed for a specific scenario. It can be used in all scenarios...none of them considered. That's not design. That's anti-design.

If you're building a device with an ethical basis; to save lives, or to protect privacy, or to expand access to information, it very much matters that your device is accessible to people. Raising prices to the detriment of unit sales directly undermines that.

All product categories are flat or down. Apple will continue to increase markup through 2019, to the degree that unit sales will drop although revenue increases. Making more money from fewer people. https://t.co/DSUh1u29TM

IMO, the mix should be:
macOS is pro, iOS is consumer.
Intel is replaced with ARM across the board.
Product lines overlap; We can have a teeny tiny Macbook Air, and a truly monstrous large iPad.
I think mixing iOS and macOS a la Marzipan is a big mistake.

1) The company rapidly restructured itself after Steve died. What was a mostly flattened organization, where you could easily do cross-functional work, became a huge stack of middle management with countless siloed focus areas.

Apple seemed to forget that working as a team, and pursuing the best possible product, regardless of where the contributions came from, was what enabled them to build great products. The difference was night and day.

One of the main reasons I decided to leave was that it was made clear by both my management and by the various departments that I worked with that my contributions were not welcome. It was clear that staying in my lane was vastly more important than any notion of teamwork.

One of the features that Apple is most proud of today was created by me and one other person. When anyone used our crude prototype, it was obvious that iPhone had to have this feature. It was awesome. We did presentations with various Apple execs and the rest is history.

Apple’s hubris-of-strategy is still operating as if Steve Jobs is picking the next winner. They’ve demonstrated they have no ability to pick a winner. Problem is, not only are they not picking winners, they’re not hedging against the possibility that their bet doesn’t pan out.

They already thought they knew what they were doing when they claimed that iPad was a serious contender for desktop computer replacement. We also know that they did not have any contingency in place in case that didn’t pan out.

His analysis is sober. The moment I realized it was when he said iPhone needed mouse support. His vision for the platform is authentic. He's not running interference for Apple any more than you're arbitrarily bashing them. You're both being genuine.

I agree with this. I think Apple fundamentally changed their strategy with X. They're no longer going to use prior generations as the discounted sellers. Instead, they're going to give you the whole lineup every year.

There's a race condition in the store. If you "buy" the content, and it gets removed before you download it, it's impossible to ever take delivery of your purchase. Could theoretically happen seconds after make a purchase. 🤣

The problem appears to be a mismatch between legal reality and customer expectation. Customers are broadly under the impression that if they have purchased content, they will be able to download that content indefinitely. https://t.co/y2u2M5kXvD

How refreshing it would be for the head of Twitter or Facebook to say "Look, we're just trying to make money. We're gonna do whatever increases engagement as much as possible. Hate-speech? Harassment? Whatever. If it bleeds, it leads." After all, that's the truth.

I refrained. Too much semantic ambiguity. The UIKit apps can certainly be dominant in quantity, but that doesn't mean they'll be good. Apple has had Numbers on iOS for a long time, and it's pretty widely despised. https://t.co/gtFDDoPROV

And as I've pointed out before...If you magically achieve the breakthroughs that enable the above, you would not only apply them to AR glasses. Smartphones, tablets, laptops, VR, and every other existing tech would get better, making it that much hard for AR to compete.

For this to work for the mass market you need all of:
- An order of magnitude improvement in DPI
- 3x improvement in field of view
- 3x performance
- 10x battery life
- 1/3rd the price
- 1/3rd the mass
These things do not go together.

Doug was at Apple before joining Tesla. He was the CTO at Segway prior to that. Doug is the VP who, shortly after Steve's death, said at a hardware engineering all hands that things were going to be "design by committee."

Possible interpretations: 1) IAP is the way to implement a demo without calling it a demo. 2) customers want a sliding scale price to pay for what they want, but not more. 3) asking someone to pay in the heat if battle is the ideal way to induce a sale. https://t.co/1cdgePmVp0

One of Apple’s problems is that they think they need to enlist outside celebrity to bring cachet to the brand. The fact is, Apple has hundreds of folks who have their own amazing stories and unique expertise - the very people who design and build Apple’s products.

Apple keeping up with everyone else is what I consider the least ambitious goal. When you have as much clout as Apple, you should be getting next-gen CPU’s before everyone else. You could even hand-select based on wafer purity or other factory line screens.

I don't buy computers from Intel. I buy them from Apple. Intel isn't the company trying to sell me a 5 year old Mac at full price. Intel also didn't design Apple's Mac Pro into a corner. Pointing at Intel isn't about fairness. It's just about covering for Apple's failures. https://t.co/bODSwZRt8p

Personally, I believe that Apple is making an enormous mistake by not being design-focused. Whereas previously products were defined to fit a particular set of uses, Marzipan seems to just throw these platforms together without good reason.

iOS’s primary benefit is mobility. It’s a powerful computer and communication device you can put in your pocket and take anywhere. You don’t have to being a keyboard and mouse with you. However, the tradeoff is that there’s an upper bound to what you can do with it.

IMO Marzipan is poor design. It merges mouse and touch paradigms while doing nothing to address the reasons for their separation. Ultimately, both are less clear, less focused, and more ambiguous. https://t.co/1jAuCFZGAT

If you compare what Apple is doing with AR with how the original iPhone was developed, it's like they're shipping iPhone apps on Mac in 2005, telling everyone it's going to be the next big platform, but they're still figuring out how to build a phone.

Hey, Joz. Stop fucking ridiculing people for having opinions. You once ridiculed people for suggesting Siri was no good, but how has that worked out? Reasonable people can disagree. https://t.co/izbSnMq3Ub